@ SansSouci
I never said a .270 would "bounce" off an elk at 400 yards. That is just silly. The hunter that can properly place a bullet at 400 yards is rare, and with a .270, it does need proper placement at that range. We can all talk about "shooting skill" and placing the shot properly, but when it comes to elk, in the field, stuff changes! I have hunted with guys who have killed literally over a hundred deer, some at very long ranges, and the elk just un-nerved them to no end. Furthermore, the "restraint" goes out the window and the yardages get pushed beyond reasonable. When we are talking elk, and precision and 400 yards, maybe a few hunters in 100 possess the skill, much less the equipment, to place the bullet as precisely as needed to make the elk DRT with a .270 past 300 yards. Wounded deer go 100 yards or so with a fatal, but not DRT hit, the same type of hit on an elk, I have personally tracked for more than 5 miles. They are large and tough. A .223 through a whitetail is probably similar to a .270 through an elk. In my experience, a .270 past about 300 yards, even with a perfect hit, will not reliably anchor elk right there. Based on the terrain and weather in most places in WY, MT and CO, that equates to a long track and in many cases, no filling of the tag. When we look at elk, it is clear that the VAST majority are killed inside 300 yards, and I have no issue with that in general with a .270. There is certainly something to be said about bullets. In my experience, just asking hunters what they are using, the majority are shooting 130 grains in the .270, because it shoots flatter. I'd much rather they use 150s in a well made bullet, but again, this goes to experience and most hunters coming from other states use the same bullets they hunt deer with.
As for the guy from Georgia, yes, I knew the game wardens, and yes, the bullets went into the lungs. Based on the hunters statements and the physical evidence, yes, I do believe that if the elk had been 200 yards or closer, or had he been using more gun, or had he been more experienced, the chances increase significantly that he would have only shot one elk. He stopped at 6 because one finally fell down. Sure they died, but it took a long time, and some covered several miles before they bled out.
If you read some of the accounts of 3rd party journalists that were with people shooting elk and bison in the early 1900s, you will quickly understand that there was a LOT of wounded game unrecovered. But like fishermen whose fish are always bigger, hunters don't write about their failures.
I'll just say this...while you have been waiting 20 years, I have been killing 1 or 2 elk a year and going 3 or 4 times a year for those same 20 years. On an average year, I see 5 or 6 elk shot in person every year. With that experience, it is clear that larger calibers kill elk much more effectively in the DRT fashion that those in the 24 to 27 caliber range. Discount that if you want.
I wish you luck in Northern New Mexico (if that is where you are headed), but the terrain and weather there is nowhere near as rugged as the more northern RM Elk terrain. The guides are phenomenal and they know the area and the elk habits like the back of their hand. Part of their skill is calming the hunter and getting them into a better position so all you really have to do is pull the trigger.
The .257 link, again, a hunter WITH a guide who provided the hunting skill, and a less rugged terrain than CO, WY or MT. One story from a 2007 hunt does not make it right. You all can keep posting stories of elk shot with .243s, 257s, 264s and 270s, but I ask, how many people will post about the elk they shot that they did not recover? NONE, but it happens EVERY day of every rifle season in Colorado. I have several personal friends who are paid guides and their sentiments are fairly close to mine in this area.
